Observational assessment of toy preferences among young children with disabilities in inclusive settings. Efficiency analysis and comparison with staff opinion.
Five short play watches tell you what toy will work as a reinforcer better than teacher opinion.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team watched toddlers with disabilities play with toys during class.
They ran five short sessions, ten sessions, and fifteen sessions.
They also asked teachers which toys each child liked best.
What they found
The five-session watch matched the longer ones.
Teacher guesses often missed the mark.
Less time gave the same answer.
How this fits with other research
Chebli et al. (2016) got the same 5-minute win, but with videos on a tablet.
Laugeson et al. (2014) seems to disagree: longer play time per item gave steadier rankings.
The two studies test different levers: H et al. cut the number of visits, A et al. stretched each visit. Both can be true; use short sessions unless you need rock-solid ranks across weeks.
Heinicke et al. (2019) and Kittler et al. (2004) reviews say "mix methods." This paper shows the observational leg can be quick.
Why it matters
You can run five brief play checks instead of guessing or dragging out assessments.
Start Monday: pick five toys, watch for two minutes each, count which one stays in the child’s hands.
Use that item first in teaching trials.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Bring five novel toys, let the child play for two minutes each, and run trials with the one they touch most.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Numerous investigations have demonstrated means of assessing preferences among students and adults with disabilities. In contrast, there has been little attention on preference identification among young children. We evaluated a preference assessment with 7 toddlers and preschoolers with disabilities in inclusive programs. First, identification of toy-play preferences was compared across three assessments that varied in amount of toy-play behavior sampled and time required for implementation (5-, 10-, and 15-session assessments). Second, results of the assessments were compared to staff opinion. Results indicated the most efficient assessment identified preferences that generally were consistent with preferences identified with the less time-efficient assessments. Results also indicated staff reports did not consistently indicate which toys were played with most frequently. Overall, results demonstrate an efficient means of determining preferences among young children with disabilities in inclusive settings. Results also suggest that staff opinion should not be relied on exclusively to determine preferences.
Behavior modification, 2003 · doi:10.1177/0145445503251588